CATALYST

[Dragonfan]

Got a reply to my below quoted comment to the ABC

 

I'm so disappointed in the ABC . . . cannabis use has purportedly dropped in the last decade so have schizophrenia rates dropped? There's very little 'truth' in this slanted report . . . I wonder who put up the money for this one [pharmachemical co or petrochemical industry]?

The bottom line is that those PREDISPOSED genetically to mental illness are at risk of setting off 'episodes' if they MISUSE cannabis . . . well gee, tell us something we don't know, tell us how efficacious cannabis is for certain diseases, how it is a wonderful herbal pain killer, how it is being researched as an anti-bacterial for the so-called 'super bugs'.

Come on ABC, lift your game!

If cannabis was legal and regulated it could be treated the same way as alcohol and tobacco [even though both those LEGAL drugs have killed more people than you can count, and continue to do so on a daily basis]!

 

Thank you for your email regarding the story about cannabis and psychosis broadcast on Catalyst on 30 October. The ABC regrets that you considered this story to be "biased, unscientific, obviously skewed propaganda".

 

I should explain that the content of Catalyst is categorised as topical and factual content for the purposes of our Code of Practice. This content category allows for the presentation of programs which reflect a wide range of audience interests, beliefs and perspectives, including programs which present controversial opinion and comment. Where topical and factual content deals with matters of contention or public debate, a diversity of principal relevant perspectives must be demonstrated across a network or platform in an appropriate timeframe.

 

In this story, Catalyst reported the results of a 2007 review of 35 studies on cannabis and mental health, published in The Lancet, which found increased risks of psychotic outcomes among cannabis users. It also reported on a longitudinal study in New Zealand which in 2005 found that adolescents with a functional polymorphism in the catechol-O-methyl transferase (COMT) gene, who regularly use cannabis, greatly increase their chances of developing psychosis. The story featured the views of psychiatrist Dr Martin Cohen, an expert on cannabis and schizophrenia, Professor Richie Poulton, director of the New Zealand study and co-author of the 2005 paper, and Chris Martin, an ex-cannabis user who experienced psychotic episodes.

 

I note your reference to "the latest out of the UK". The study discussed in The Register article to which you refer is 'Familial predisposition for psychiatric disorder: comparison of subjects treated for cannabis-induced psychosis and schizophrenia' by Arendt et al, recently published in Archives of General Psychiatry. This study found that cannabis-induced psychosis could be an early sign of schizophrenia rather than a distinct clinical entity, a conclusion which does not contradict the results of the 2005 New Zealand study or the 2007 review published in The Lancet.

 

On review, the ABC is satisfied that the content of this story was consistent with the editorial requirements for topical and factual content. Nonetheless, please be assured that your comments have been noted by the Catalyst team and conveyed to ABC Television management. Thank you for bringing your concerns to the ABC's attention. I have attached a link to the Code of Practice for your information: http://abc.net.au/corp/pubs/documents/2008...evised_2008.pdf

 

Yours sincerely

 

Simon Melkman

ABC Audience & Consumer Affairs

 

I particularly LOVE the verbosity exhibited by this most loquacious mouthpiece for the ABC!

 

What a load of bull!

 

Methinks I'll reply, line by line blowing their bull out of the water . . .

[bufo marinus]

I'd be sticking as closely to the facts as possible and quoting Dr Wodac and the relevant studies he quoted

You have lots of links to good studies also dragonfan as well as all the stuff here, and these people actually took notice, respectfully, don't miss out nailing them with some excellent info the second time!

Much respect though for having the guts to send the first email, well done

[lightning]

Dragon

I just got my reply from catalyst too and it is almost word for word yours with some extras for points I made in my email

Thank you for your email regarding the story about cannabis and psychosis broadcast on Catalyst on 30 October. The ABC regrets that you considered the content of this story to be propaganda and pseudoscience.

 

I should explain that the content of Catalyst is categorised as topical and factual content for the purposes of our Code of Practice. This content category allows for the presentation of programs which reflect a wide range of audience interests, beliefs and perspectives, including programs which present controversial opinion and comment. Where topical and factual content deals with matters of contention or public debate, a diversity of principal relevant perspectives must be demonstrated across a network or platform in an appropriate timeframe.

 

In this story, Catalyst reported the results of a 2007 review of 35 studies on cannabis and mental health, published in The Lancet, which found increased risks of psychotic outcomes among cannabis users. It also reported on a longitudinal study in New Zealand which in 2005 found that adolescents with a functional polymorphism in the catechol-O-methyl transferase (COMT) gene, who regularly use cannabis, greatly increase their chances of developing psychosis. The story featured the views of psychiatrist Dr Martin Cohen, an expert on cannabis and schizophrenia, Professor Richie Poulton, director of the New Zealand study and co-author of the 2005 paper, and Chris Martin, an ex-cannabis user who experienced psychotic episodes.

 

I note your view that Catalyst incorrectly named Cannabis sativa as marijuana. The Macquarie Dictionary defines marijuana as follows:

 

"marijuana

/maruh'wahnuh/.

noun

1. the Indian hemp, Cannabis sativa.

2. its dried leaves and flowers, used in cigarettes and food as a narcotic and intoxicant."

 

Accordingly, in the ABC's view, it is not incorrect to refer to Cannabis sativa as marijuana.

 

I also note your reference to "the Zurich study undertaken by the Swiss army". In fact, no such study was discussed by Catalyst. The only study from Zurich mentioned in the story was 'Psychotic experiences in the general population: A twenty-year prospective community study', by R

[entheofarm]

they should divulge the police report on the dickhead with a knife in the city!

 

I will bet my left testicle he was known to the police and is a fuckwit in general!

 

How is easy for him to blame the herb and get off lightly!

 

"oh no it wasn't my fault I am an idiot it was the evil herb" FUCK OFF

 

I will bet my other testicle the ABC wont report on when the little fuck goes to jail for stabbing someone (even now he is all better)

 

fuck you ABC your on the list with the Qld police and K Rudd! No xmas cards for you

[Dragonfan]

Okies, I'd like some input . . . this is what I've written to lob back at the ABC post their reply to my email/online comment on the bullshit that they spouted on Catalyst . . .

 

 

Simon Melkman

ABC Audience and Consumer Affairs

 

Re: Catalyst, Marijuana Madness

 

Thank you for your reply of 25 November regarding the above ABC program, of which I must say the title alone would highlight to anyone how slanted this program was going to be, and, unsuprisingly, was! I stand by what I originally said in the comments on your website and in my email and your reply has done nothing to dissuade me from my firm belief that what the ABC broadcast in that particular program was nothing but 2008 style

[Gnobong]

Maybe they get extra funding from the gubberment when they do a hatchet job on cannabis

[lightning]

Dragon good one, well laid out and argued.

good to show them completely misquoting studies.

I vaguely remember reading a peer review of the lancet study which discredited a number of their claims as being without enough data to back them,

I believe the review came from Ireland. one of the threads here had it no idea which one though

 

maybe CC the email to the Aust Broadcasting tribunal as a complaint

Edited December 1, 2008 by lightning

[mull]

Dragon, awesome work there mate, 'loquacious verbosity' was gold

 

When the pharma thc meds come into the aus medicinal market, it will be interesting to hear how the abc sell the remarkable efficacy of synthesized cannabinoids.. while continuing with stories like this one to keep everybody's free plant down.

Perhaps they won't use a vet next time tho.

 

the oxford says psychosis is - a severe mental derangement, involving loss of contact with reality..

 

..it could then be said, around 99% of cannabis related media stories in australia, suffer from psychosis!

 

.. and will likely go on to develop - greed for funding syndrome.. with its list of common symptoms..

[Dragonfan]

. . . maybe CC the email to the Aust Broadcasting tribunal as a complaint

How interesting the ACMA, Aust Communications and Media Authority [as the Aust Broadcasting Tribunal became in 2007] states the following;

Complaints Concerning the ABC or SBS

ABC

If your complaint is about an ABC service, such as ABC Radio National or ABC Classic FM, it should be made to the ABC head office. You can do this by sending a letter to the ABC head office, or making your complaint through the ABC website.

 

If you wish, you can print the ACMA complaint form and send it to the ABC head office after you have completed it . . . Note that licence conditions contained in the Broadcasting Services Act (other than those for captioning) do not apply to ABC services. The ABC has its own Act and charter.

 

I shall send my email off to ABC Audience and Consumer Affairs and cc it to their head office as well . . . oh, bit pointless, just checked the ABC's own site and the complaint only goes to the ABC Audience & Consumer Affairs . . . emails . . . are noted by ABC Audience & Consumer Affairs and conveyed to the relevant program area. However, the ABC further states . . . Complaints Review Executive (CRE) - If you are not satisfied with a response you have received from ABC Audience & Consumer Affairs, we encourage you to forward your complaint to the ABC's Complaints Review Executive for independent review. You should set out the reasons why you are not satisfied with the ABC's response to your complaint. Mmm, shall ponder sending off a rocket to them after I hear back, if I do, from the Audience and Consumer Affairs section . . . the ABC moderating the ABC . . . that's really gonna achieve something . . . . NOT!

 

 

 

Oh this is priceless . . . I got a reply!

 

Thank you for your further email.

 

Your additional comments about the Catalyst story on cannabis and psychosis are noted. Should you remain dissatisfied with the ABC's response to your concerns, there are several avenues of review available to you. These are outlined on the ABC website here: http://abc.net.au/contact/complaints_process.htm#response.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Simon Melkman

ABC Audience & Consumer Affairs

 

Mmm, okies, I'll play their game and will use THEIR complaint process so the ABC can deal with a complaint about the ABC . . . however, I think the Minister for communications and whatever else needs to be informed of the bull going out over the airwaves . . . don't think he's got much else on his plate at the mo', oh, aside from trying to take away our INTERNET FREEDOM!!

Edited December 2, 2008 by Dragonfan

[lightning]

give it to em, Conroy does not know how to communicate so don't hold your breathe on that one,unless of course